Agni V Missile

[sesha_maruthi27]

surya is non issue, aim for SLBM with MIRVs.

Well going by the testings which have been done, we can say that India already has the tech and only the testing of the missile from ATS is remaining.

 

[Compersion]

Not sure why the image of Indian ICBM is used to make a threat to countries 10,000 km away in the political class. It can also be used to send a signal that India will offer protection, support and assistance to countries 10,000 km away.

 

[Kyubi]

Not sure why the image of Indian ICBM is used to make a threat to countries 10,000 km away in the political class. It can also be used to send a signal that India will offer protection, support and assistance to countries 10,000 km away.

If that is our approach, if countries require our assistance, then the best possible way is to have a CBG to patrol those areas, send in reinforcements, deploy aircrafts for observation, surveillance and DAS roles.. i dont see the need to deploy an ICBM to safeguard the interests of a country. It will serve no tactical help, also there are no doctrines for a country to deploy a nuclear tipped ICBM until and unless when the war is thrust upon them and when it has faced a first round of Nuclear attack....

 

[Compersion]

If that is our approach, if countries require our assistance, then the best possible way is to have a CBG to patrol those areas, send in reinforcements, deploy aircrafts for observation, surveillance and DAS roles.. i dont see the need to deploy an ICBM to safeguard the interests of a country. It will serve no tactical help, also there are no doctrines for a country to deploy a nuclear tipped ICBM until and unless when the war is thrust upon them and when it has faced a first round of Nuclear attack....

i would like to disagree. at the outset i am defining ICBM to be 10,000 km range (this does not include Agni series at this moment). I feel there is too much emphasis on making justification on India needing ICBM from the viewpoint that it does not need to threaten states 10,000 km away. For example if India gets ICBM (explicit and official confirmation) there is the assumption heads of states and countries 10,000 km away will automatically think they are being targeted by India. A ICBM has to be seen from a viewpoint of offering support, assistance and defense to states 10,000 km away - a role India needs to envision itself. This support is not military but also geo-politically and can be offered in conjunction with our "soft-power" and our position being a large democracy along with upholding important principles and rights to show to states they have our support and assistance. You even mention the role of "CBG to patrol those areas, send in reinforcements, deploy aircrafts for observation, surveillance and DAS roles". If these are backed up by ICBM capability they would have more weightage, reinforcement and capability in projecting our message of support and assistance.

you look at the Americans and the support and assistance they are providing to the Asia Pacific countries. They are offering support and assistance and not explicit threats. On the other extreme one can look at Falklands.

Look at these examples:

Distance between India and the following (each have different reasons for offering support and assistance through Indian ICBM):

Fiji
Japan (northern most tip)
South Africa
Trinidad and Tobago
Russia
Brasil
France
Algeria
United Kingdom

 

[sayareakd]

ICBM is needed and it has its own advantages, but right now enemy is close to our border therefore best alternative till formal ICBM is K4 with MIRV. Just make as many nukes subs as possible and put K4 on it. Then you dont need ICBMs. Just send few nukes subs near those countries that is enough to scare them.

 

[Kyubi]

i would like to disagree. at the outset i am defining ICBM to be 10,000 km range (this does not include Agni series at this moment). I feel there is too much emphasis on making justification on India needing ICBM from the viewpoint that it does not need to threaten states 10,000 km away. For example if India gets ICBM (explicit and official confirmation) there is the assumption heads of states and countries 10,000 km away will automatically think they are being targeted by India. A ICBM has to be seen from a viewpoint of offering support, assistance and defense to states 10,000 km away - a role India needs to envision itself. This support is not military but also geo-politically and can be offered in conjunction with our "soft-power" and our position being a large democracy along with upholding important principles and rights to show to states they have our support and assistance. You even mention the role of "CBG to patrol those areas, send in reinforcements, deploy aircrafts for observation, surveillance and DAS roles". If these are backed up by ICBM capability they would have more weightage, reinforcement and capability in projecting our message of support and assistance.

you look at the Americans and the support and assistance they are providing to the Asia Pacific countries. They are offering support and assistance and not explicit threats. On the other extreme one can look at Falklands.

Look at these examples:

Distance between India and the following (each have different reasons for offering support and assistance through Indian ICBM):

Fiji
Japan (northern most tip)
South Africa
Trinidad and Tobago
Russia
Brasil
France
Algeria
United Kingdom

I do understand your point of view, but to back such a concept our diplomacy with international countries has to be potent, our external policies needs to be modified to suit such a role. Apart from all these, our economic growth should be fast and it should facilitate our growing military might. All these said and done, we do need to have overseas Naval Stations, sizable army contingents to warrant a CBG to patrol those areas..

To my understanding i don't think americans have there Peacemakers directed towards asia-pacific region, where it is widely known to have a sizeable contingent of Army, Navy, Air force and USMC.
The idea of India coming to the aid of a nation subjected to war is palatable, but at the same time backing the very country with a ICBM is certainly not a very wise thing to do, even the defendant has an equal right to ask for support
What if China were to deploy DF series ICBM's at US at the behest of North Korea on whom america has waged a war. how would you justify this situation??
IT is my opinion that ICBM's are there to protect one's own country and it should be not used as a deterrent when it comes to protecting other states. Using CBG itself guarantees a potent military threat to the enemy, but using ICBM's as a force multiplier isn't gonna go down well with the international community..

 

[Compersion]

I do understand your point of view, but to back such a concept our diplomacy with international countries has to be potent, our external policies needs to be modified to suit such a role. Apart from all these, our economic growth should be fast and it should facilitate our growing military might. All these said and done, we do need to have overseas Naval Stations, sizable army contingents to warrant a CBG to patrol those areas..

To my understanding i don't think americans have there Peacemakers directed towards asia-pacific region, where it is widely known to have a sizeable contingent of Army, Navy, Air force and USMC.
The idea of India coming to the aid of a nation subjected to war is palatable, but at the same time backing the very country with a ICBM is certainly not a very wise thing to do, even the defendant has an equal right to ask for support
What if China were to deploy DF series ICBM's at US at the behest of North Korea on whom america has waged a war. how would you justify this situation??
IT is my opinion that ICBM's are there to protect one's own country and it should be not used as a deterrent when it comes to protecting other states. Using CBG itself guarantees a potent military threat to the enemy, but using ICBM's as a force multiplier isn't gonna go down well with the international community..

Good to read the response. I worry what you say is the mindsight of our current political class. I would like the mindsight of our political class to change a little at this moment it is fearing the response of countries that are 10,000 km away by doing a ICBM test. It is like the hindsight of realizing that it would be too much "mental" work and why go through with the trouble. The mindsight has to change and that has to be that a Indian ICBM test is for the benefit of world peace and the comity of nations would do well and prosper with countries like India having ICBM that would support other countries because of our position being a large democracy along with upholding important principles and rights. It in itself is one of the reason for us to get on the UNSC.

You mention the ideal premise that our diplomacy needs to be adjusted and fine-tuned along with our economic growth being turbo charged. I refer to you the years 1971 - 1981. The PRC does and did not have the ability and principle(s) that we are having today yet tested the Dongfeng 5 and replaced ROC on UNSC. We need to only evaluate our self compared to 1971 PRC and nothing else. Not the 2014 PRC. We are far far ahead of 1971 PRC in flavor and capability.

Next i refer to the GSLV. We have the capability to launch heavier satellites yet shy away from declaring the capability to send a warhead(s) 10,000 km away. We can send heavy payload millions of miles away yet fear testing to 10,000 + km range. We have even declared openly to developing a more heavy lifter in GSLV MK3. These are projects that are not done by nations that want to play a small role in the comity of nations. You have a small number of nations looking with envy and feeling threatened. But there are a majority of nations among the comity of nations that are looking at India and thinking with good intent and do not look at India with envy and feel threatened. *I am not saying that GSLV is the same technology to be used in ICBM and the foundation of ICBM test. I am saying the response of the comity of nations to GSLV is not one of fear and feeling threatened but more welcoming and respecting that India is playing a peaceful role in space and (economical) satellite launch capability.

GSLV MkIII, the next milestone | Frontline

My whole premise is that the comity of nations and the world will not belittle and argue against India being declared a ICBM of 10,000 km + user. It is natural and customary for nations like India to be welcomed and supported into such clubs and groups.

I also feel doing the IBCM 10,000 km test would be a huge impetus for the country and declaring its role among the comity of nations. This would include the economic area that you touch upon because a country that declares that it is strong militarily and has ICBM capability that is not a threat to the world but a weapon of peace (i am sure it must be in everyones minds to use this phrase later) this would enthuse confidence for investors and people at large to come and invest in India. You deal with stability, strength and predictability.

Next you put into writing some thoughts along to why ICBM states would offer support and assistance. ICBMs have a huge role in the Asia Pacific and especially the USA support to countries. If USA did not have the ICBM they would not be able to project such a foreign policy that is without a doubt. It is not a question of peacemakers being targetted at [x] it is the ability to tell the nation(s) that they have ICBM capability and will be protected even if the USA armed forces are not in large strength nearby (one can refer to the USA reduction of the forces for one aspect).

Next you mention why would a ICBM state offer support to another ICBM state - it is because the person offering such a support is indicating to the offeree that they need not feel threatened by the offeror. (I would include USA into this but it would be better they discover that themselves). The PRC is not including in this dynamics because PRC is a threat to India and unfortunately sometimes declares this openly. Further the ICBM test would not be for PRC we already have the current Agni series for that.

You mention PRC and their North Korean policy with USA. I would state it is a fact the PRC support North Korea and also they are able to take and make such positions because of their ICBMs and also their seat on UNSC. The PRC ICBMs are used to threaten and not offer support, help and assistance that the India ICBM (10,000 km+) needs and will have to be positioned. Also if we rely on our nukes subs and the K4 missile it is still limiting the tactical footprint of India. A nuke sub with K4 missile still has a chance of detection compared to a nuke sub with a ICBM of 10,000 km +. I am sure the Naval commander would prefer a nuke sub with a ICBM and tuck the nuke sub further away and less likely to be detected. The footprint and representation of such a capability to those countries will not only scare them but prevent them from doing anything before being scared by us.

Some might say why does a poor nation need to develop a ICBM. I refer to the 1971 - 1981 period of PRC. We are far far ahead of PRC in 1971 - 1981.

It is like the Indian Aircraft carrier and GSLV and nuke subs. Why do we need them when we have the LST and PSLV and diesel subs. Our development of Indian AIrcraft Carrier and GSLV and nuke subs does not make the comity of nations feel threatened. Our development of Indian Aircraft Carrier and GSLV and nuke subs supports the underlying message that India will help and support the comity of nations in upholding world peace and development through our position being a large democracy along with upholding important principles and rights. Our foreign policy supports the same message. Hence i might say we would not need to change and adjust our foreign policy too much.

A ICBM test has to be done with confidence and transparently with openness. I feel it is a natural progression that will come ultimately by India and the world will not feel threatened and there is no need to fear. India will do it with good intent.

 

[Kyubi]

Good to read the response. I worry what you say is the mindsight of our current political class. I would like the mindsight of our political class to change a little at this moment it is fearing the response of countries that are 10,000 km away by doing a ICBM test. It is like the hindsight of realizing that it would be too much "mental" work and why go through with the trouble. The mindsight has to change and that has to be that a Indian ICBM test is for the benefit of world peace and the comity of nations would do well and prosper with countries like India having ICBM that would support other countries because of our position being a large democracy along with upholding important principles and rights. It in itself is one of the reason for us to get on the UNSC.

I totally agree with you over the issue of having a long range ICBM's, regarding the mindset of political class it is for their wisdom to see that we get a permanent seat in UNSC. But on what grounds should we claim the seat is debatable.

We need to only evaluate our self compared to 1971 PRC and nothing else. Not the 2014 PRC. We are far far ahead of 1971 PRC in flavor and capability.

I Dont see how why do we have to compare our self with 1971 PRC, you talk about the issue of principles and capability of 1971 PRC viz-a-vis with India's, personally i don't see how intuitive would this comparison be, when we talk about UNSC seat. You certainly can't expect that our requirement should be based on 40year old socio-economic status of China, its incomprehensive.

*I am not saying that GSLV is the same technology to be used in ICBM and the foundation of ICBM test. I am saying the response of the comity of nations to GSLV is not one of fear and feeling threatened but more welcoming and respecting that India is playing a peaceful role in space and (economical) satellite launch capability.

When we talk about missiles being tested the issue that are constantly associated with such acts is that how does our enemy perceive's it. It is but natural for the enemy to raise a ruckus ( Pakistan) over such acts, China on the other hand plays down this act and creates disturbances along our borders deliberately attempting to incite us, intimidate us, these are characteristic traits of China. Now when you talk about GSLV launch being welcomed by countries merely out of appreciation for our R&D work is an understatement, here i am not referring to NASA which is years ahead than us, but i am referring to other Space organisations which may feel slightly alarmed at our capabilities. Low cost satellites launches etc they do have legitimate reasons to feel a bit threatened.

I also feel doing the IBCM 10,000 km test would be a huge impetus for the country and declaring its role among the comity of nations. This would include the economic area that you touch upon because a country that declares that it is strong militarily and has ICBM capability that is not a threat to the world but a weapon of peace (i am sure it must be in everyones minds to use this phrase later) this would enthuse confidence for investors and people at large to come and invest in India. You deal with stability, strength and predictability.

Here i have to disagree with your line of thought, I don't see how a ICBM test would uplift a country's economy or would as you say enthuse corporates for FDI in India. How would that in any way help boost economy, with our pokhran test we had to face sanctions and what not, i dont say that we will be facing the same again, but surely an ICBM test is not the way forward to attract FDI. It wyould showcases India in a arms race with it's neighbours, also we need to keep in mind of Pakistan who time and again use the issue of missiles test in India to further their agenda on using Nuke's against us .We do have to consider bilateral relations with our neighbours . So ICBM test IMHO does not signify economic prosperity but it does showcases a strong, significant , potent and a decisive super power (Militarily ) . The other point you also make is that we can showcase ICBM to be a weapon of peace, I'd say even the US says the same thing, they hide behind the garb of maintaining peace and goes about destroying countries.. Its just an understatement to say ICBM is a weapon of peace. I'am not saying we shouldn't conduct a test, but naming it as weapon of peace is just farce.

Next you put into writing some thoughts along to why ICBM states would offer support and assistance. ICBMs have a huge role in the Asia Pacific and especially the USA support to countries. If USA did not have the ICBM they would not be able to project such a foreign policy that is without a doubt. It is not a question of peacemakers being targetted at [x] it is the ability to tell the nation(s) that they have ICBM capability and will be protected even if the USA armed forces are not in large strength nearby (one can refer to the USA reduction of the forces for one aspect).

Here again I argue that as a nation one does not an ICBM of such a range to come to the aid of a friendly nation, A CBG is a quintessential force multiplier.

You mention PRC and their North Korean policy with USA. I would state it is a fact the PRC support North Korea and also they are able to take and make such positions because of their ICBMs and also their seat on UNSC. The PRC ICBMs are used to threaten and not offer support, help and assistance that the India ICBM (10,000 km+) needs and will have to be positioned.

Here i implore you to reason, i ask you to think on both sides of the line, you are putting India in perspective and relaying your thought. How can you say that an Indian ICBM is not seen by other's as a potential threat. Hypothetically speaking if India offers to help South Korea in its war with NK and it openly declares its intent to use ICBMS, Similarly China will do the same for NK, how do you see this impasse being solved.

A ICBM test has to be done with confidence and transparently with openness. I feel it is a natural progression that will come ultimately by India and the world will not feel threatened and there is no need to fear. India will do it with good intent.

Yes i Believe with India's brilliant non proliferation track record we have nothing to be threatened nor have the need to threaten anybody.

 

[Compersion]

I Dont see how why do we have to compare our self with 1971 PRC, you talk about the issue of principles and capability of 1971 PRC viz-a-vis with India's, personally i don't see how intuitive would this comparison be, when we talk about UNSC seat. You certainly can't expect that our requirement should be based on 40year old socio-economic status of China, its incomprehensive.

One needs to have a reference to PRC 1971 - 1981 not because they are a threat and also not out of incomprehension but because of precedence and the reality that was the last state to have been (replaced another) admitted onto UNSC parallel with ICBM tests of its own during the 1971 - 1981 period. The 40 year old socio-economic status of PRC is valid and appropriate comparison to India now since that was the last state to have declared and used the apparatus within the comity of nations to project and display such means.

If one wants to do something they look at the last person who did it. And in this case the last person that did it had less capability along with credentials.

The PRC in 1971 - 1981 did not compare it self to USA, Russia, France, UK of 1971 - 1981 but to these states in the era of 1945. For india the apt comparison would again not be PRC of 2014 let alone USA, Russia, France, Uk of 2014 but the PRC of 1971 - 1981. It is not out of choice but out of precedence and credibility. Further the 2014 India is far far ahead of 1971 PRC is both flavour and capability and credibility and thus needs to be understood when one speaks about ICBM test because when PRC tested ICBM in 1971 - 1981 the reasons were there. The PRC threatened and projected military strength through use of ICBM test. The premise for India ICBM is not about self-defence too much since the Agni series is there to cater for that perception and threatening posture and declaring militarily strength but the ICBM ought to be there to declare and reinforce India having ICBM would support other countries because of our position being a large democracy along with upholding important principles and rights. It is projecting kilter strength but not through use of force and threatening posture. No country ought to feel threatened if India tests ICBM because India need not threatened them and has reason to. There is no country that ought to feel threatened by India ICBM test. It is not about threatening other states but about taking a step ahead in being able to offer support and assistance to states a role that has to matches our status.

You throw into the mixture the GSLV, nukes subs, Aircraft Carrier and the reactions of other states is more towards accommodation compared to isolation. States away from the Asia region are not threatened by gslv, nuke subs, aircraft carrier. Yet states outside Asia region are impacted by india nuke subs, gslv and aircraft carrier. It is natural assumption and profession a india ICBM test will be welcomed with such trajectory. The political class of India needs to remove its fear that states 10,000 km away will feel threatened and will put pressure on India like what happened after Pokhram 1 and 2.

When we talk about missiles being tested the issue that are constantly associated with such acts is that how does our enemy perceive's it. It is but natural for the enemy to raise a ruckus ( Pakistan) over such acts, China on the other hand plays down this act and creates disturbances along our borders deliberately attempting to incite us, intimidate us, these are characteristic traits of China. Now when you talk about GSLV launch being welcomed by countries merely out of appreciation for our R&D work is an understatement, here i am not referring to NASA which is years ahead than us, but i am referring to other Space organisations which may feel slightly alarmed at our capabilities. Low cost satellites launches etc they do have legitimate reasons to feel a bit threatened.

Here I do not deny your line of thought but it is not relevant to ICBM testing, the beauty of ICBM test is that it would not concern pakis and PRC and their opinion would not matter. india can simply answer that Agni series is there for them. Also they are ignored on nuke subs, gslv and aircraft carrier. Other states will ask but why the need for ICBM test and India can answer that one never knows in the future and it wants to be able to offer support and assistance to states in the comity of nations and it is not a threat to any state in any case. the states India needs to threaten are below ICBM range. The states that india would like to offer support and assistance to are in and above ICBM range, india wants to promote peace and stability.

next GSLV was welcomed through accommodation and acknowledgement that India has the capability to launch heavy satellites. Further one needs to acknowledge the future india ICBM test does not break any international law, treaty and risk any sanctions. The gslv test might be feared like you say because of competition to others because india offers cheaper launch cost per kilo but not because india having gslv will threatened others by using that capability to militarise space, be aggressive and use its launch capability for non-peaceful means on others, unlike other nations. the appreciation that india ICBM test will be viewed with isolation by the comity of nations I believe is pessimistic and unrealistic. I believe a india ICBM test will not be adverse to india but accepted by the comity of nations. India simply does not threaten any state that is 10,000 km away. India has good relationship with states in and above the ICBM range.

Here i have to disagree with your line of thought, I don't see how a ICBM test would uplift a country's economy or would as you say enthuse corporates for FDI in India. How would that in any way help boost economy, with our pokhran test we had to face sanctions and what not, i dont say that we will be facing the same again, but surely an ICBM test is not the way forward to attract FDI. It wyould showcases India in a arms race with it's neighbours, also we need to keep in mind of Pakistan who time and again use the issue of missiles test in India to further their agenda on using Nuke's against us .We do have to consider bilateral relations with our neighbours . So ICBM test IMHO does not signify economic prosperity but it does showcases a strong, significant , potent and a decisive super power (Militarily ) . The other point you also make is that we can showcase ICBM to be a weapon of peace, I'd say even the US says the same thing, they hide behind the garb of maintaining peace and goes about destroying countries.. Its just an understatement to say ICBM is a weapon of peace. I'am not saying we shouldn't conduct a test, but naming it as weapon of peace is just farce.

Sure economic discussion is not a strong point for testing ICBM but it is there if one looks closely to precedence. The Economic angle is not the primary reason for testing but it' can be seen if one looks at situations like GSLV test and Pokhram test. After these tests the dealing and interaction within and among the comity of nations is of the level of having such capability and the technological and scientific interaction is one having such qualifications. One needs to look at the technological denial before Pokhram and GSLV and determine was it better economically for India before and after the tests. It's a fact that after declaring the capability the comity of nations deals with India having the capability and the interaction is of higher standard and of higher economical value, I refer to possible launch facilities in 2000 kg class + to other nations, and the civil nuclear deals with other nations. I refer to the technological dealings with other nations subsequent. After Pokhram 2 there was sanctions but that was to preserve the international framework and system and due to ego and geo political consideration but india did not break any international law and commitment and it was their right to test. Again ICBM test india will not break any international law and commitment and it is their right to test. And after the ICBM test the comity of nations will deal with india having a higher technological and scientific standard and higher economic value equivalent to nations having such capability. Further states will feel secure and confident dealing with a nation having such a capability.

Here again I argue that as a nation one does not an ICBM of such a range to come to the aid of a friendly nation, A CBG is a quintessential force multiplier.

A CBG supported by ICBM capability is better compared to a CBG without ICBM capability. Also a state with ICBM can come to a aid to friendly nation without CBG.

Here i implore you to reason, i ask you to think on both sides of the line, you are putting India in perspective and relaying your thought. How can you say that an Indian ICBM is not seen by other's as a potential threat. Hypothetically speaking if India offers to help South Korea in its war with NK and it openly declares its intent to use ICBMS, Similarly China will do the same for NK, how do you see this impasse being solved.

This is exactly the point that India needs to test ICBM it is to offer support and assistance to nations like South Korea if they are threatened by states like North Korea. India ICBM would be important for world peace and stability and also India having ICBM would support such countries because of our position being a large democracy along with upholding important principles and rights. Surely yes india will more likely support South Korea compared to North Korea. South Korea will have support from other ICBM states including USA, France, uk (Russia might abstain). If PRC does same to NK the situation becomes heightened and requires a multilateral solution that India and other ICBM states will prevail along themselves. india with ICBM will not threaten any state on its own, india with ICBM is not a threat to any state, india with Agni is a threat to states that it needs to threaten. India with ICBM offers support and assistance to the comity of nations and promotes world peace and stability because of india upholding important principles and rights.

I don't believe india and china will engage one another because india supports sk with ICBM and likewise PRC supports NK. But yes NK will see sk has support of ICBM States like india, USA, uk and will think before being more aggressive, again the above is hypothetical and also india ICBM has a variety of ways that its ICBM capability would be used. In such analysis I refer to different set of countries mentioned earlier above with each with its own equations.

Yes i Believe with India's brilliant non proliferation track record we have nothing to be threatened nor have the need to threaten anybody.

Good point.

Also I fail to understand why India downplays its Missile range. There is a feeling that emphasis is being placed that the missile range needs to be below 6,000 km. why pretend others are ignorant and be open and declare the capability and ability is there to go beyond 10,000 km and do that in a test. Test a missile beyond 10,000 km. name the missile shanti.

 

[CCP]

One needs to have a reference to PRC 1971 - 1981 not because they are a threat and also not out of incomprehension but because of precedence and the reality that was the last state to have been (replaced another) admitted onto UNSC parallel with ICBM tests of its own during the 1971 - 1981 period. The 40 year old socio-economic status of PRC is valid and appropriate comparison to India now since that was the last state to have declared and used the apparatus within the comity of nations to project and display such means.

If one wants to do something they look at the last person who did it. And in this case the last person that did it had less capability along with credentials.

The PRC in 1971 - 1981 did not compare it self to USA, Russia, France, UK of 1971 - 1981 but to these states in the era of 1945. For india the apt comparison would again not be PRC of 2014 let alone USA, Russia, France, Uk of 2014 but the PRC of 1971 - 1981. It is not out of choice but out of precedence and credibility. Further the 2014 India is far far ahead of 1971 PRC is both flavour and capability and credibility and thus needs to be understood when one speaks about ICBM test because when PRC tested ICBM in 1971 - 1981 the reasons were there. The PRC threatened and projected military strength through use of ICBM test. The premise for India ICBM is not about self-defence too much since the Agni series is there to cater for that perception and threatening posture and declaring militarily strength but the ICBM ought to be there to declare and reinforce India having ICBM would support other countries because of our position being a large democracy along with upholding important principles and rights. It is projecting kilter strength but not through use of force and threatening posture. No country ought to feel threatened if India tests ICBM because India need not threatened them and has reason to. There is no country that ought to feel threatened by India ICBM test. It is not about threatening other states but about taking a step ahead in being able to offer support and assistance to states a role that has to matches our status.

You throw into the mixture the GSLV, nukes subs, Aircraft Carrier and the reactions of other states is more towards accommodation compared to isolation. States away from the Asia region are not threatened by gslv, nuke subs, aircraft carrier. Yet states outside Asia region are impacted by india nuke subs, gslv and aircraft carrier. It is natural assumption and profession a india ICBM test will be welcomed with such trajectory. The political class of India needs to remove its fear that states 10,000 km away will feel threatened and will put pressure on India like what happened after Pokhram 1 and 2.



Here I do not deny your line of thought but it is not relevant to ICBM testing, the beauty of ICBM test is that it would not concern pakis and PRC and their opinion would not matter. india can simply answer that Agni series is there for them. Also they are ignored on nuke subs, gslv and aircraft carrier. Other states will ask but why the need for ICBM test and India can answer that one never knows in the future and it wants to be able to offer support and assistance to states in the comity of nations and it is not a threat to any state in any case. the states India needs to threaten are below ICBM range. The states that india would like to offer support and assistance to are in and above ICBM range, india wants to promote peace and stability.

next GSLV was welcomed through accommodation and acknowledgement that India has the capability to launch heavy satellites. Further one needs to acknowledge the future india ICBM test does not break any international law, treaty and risk any sanctions. The gslv test might be feared like you say because of competition to others because india offers cheaper launch cost per kilo but not because india having gslv will threatened others by using that capability to militarise space, be aggressive and use its launch capability for non-peaceful means on others, unlike other nations. the appreciation that india ICBM test will be viewed with isolation by the comity of nations I believe is pessimistic and unrealistic. I believe a india ICBM test will not be adverse to india but accepted by the comity of nations. India simply does not threaten any state that is 10,000 km away. India has good relationship with states in and above the ICBM range.



Sure economic discussion is not a strong point for testing ICBM but it is there if one looks closely to precedence. The Economic angle is not the primary reason for testing but it' can be seen if one looks at situations like GSLV test and Pokhram test. After these tests the dealing and interaction within and among the comity of nations is of the level of having such capability and the technological and scientific interaction is one having such qualifications. One needs to look at the technological denial before Pokhram and GSLV and determine was it better economically for India before and after the tests. It's a fact that after declaring the capability the comity of nations deals with India having the capability and the interaction is of higher standard and of higher economical value, I refer to possible launch facilities in 2000 kg class + to other nations, and the civil nuclear deals with other nations. I refer to the technological dealings with other nations subsequent. After Pokhram 2 there was sanctions but that was to preserve the international framework and system and due to ego and geo political consideration but india did not break any international law and commitment and it was their right to test. Again ICBM test india will not break any international law and commitment and it is their right to test. And after the ICBM test the comity of nations will deal with india having a higher technological and scientific standard and higher economic value equivalent to nations having such capability. Further states will feel secure and confident dealing with a nation having such a capability.



A CBG supported by ICBM capability is better compared to a CBG without ICBM capability. Also a state with ICBM can come to a aid to friendly nation without CBG.



This is exactly the point that India needs to test ICBM it is to offer support and assistance to nations like South Korea if they are threatened by states like North Korea. India ICBM would be important for world peace and stability and also India having ICBM would support such countries because of our position being a large democracy along with upholding important principles and rights. Surely yes india will more likely support South Korea compared to North Korea. South Korea will have support from other ICBM states including USA, France, uk (Russia might abstain). If PRC does same to NK the situation becomes heightened and requires a multilateral solution that India and other ICBM states will prevail along themselves. india with ICBM will not threaten any state on its own, india with ICBM is not a threat to any state, india with Agni is a threat to states that it needs to threaten. India with ICBM offers support and assistance to the comity of nations and promotes world peace and stability because of india upholding important principles and rights.

I don't believe india and china will engage one another because india supports sk with ICBM and likewise PRC supports NK. But yes NK will see sk has support of ICBM States like india, USA, uk and will think before being more aggressive, again the above is hypothetical and also india ICBM has a variety of ways that its ICBM capability would be used. In such analysis I refer to different set of countries mentioned earlier above with each with its own equations.



Good point.

Also I fail to understand why India downplays its Missile range. There is a feeling that emphasis is being placed that the missile range needs to be below 6,000 km. why pretend others are ignorant and be open and declare the capability and ability is there to go beyond 10,000 km and do that in a test. Test a missile beyond 10,000 km. name the missile shanti.

Let's compare India (today) with China at 1971:

China

1.First hydrogen bomb test: "Test No. 6" - June 17, 1967
The yield was 3.3 megatons.dropped by H-6 bomber.
Test No. 6 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlaP52uzckI

2.The decision to develop the DF-4 was made in 1965.
The range of the Dong Feng 4, which is equipped with a 2,190 kg nuclear warhead with 3.3 Mt yield, with a nominal range of 5,500 km.
DF-4 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


3. DF3 + Thermonuclear warhead tests yield 3mt and 3.4mt at 1969
Database of nuclear tests, China-PRC

4.DF-5 1971
The Dongfeng 5[Wǔ] (Chinese: 東風-5, literally "Eurus 5") or DF-5 is a 3 stage Chinese ICBM. It has a length of 32.6 m and a diameter of 3.35 m. It weighs in at 183,000 kilograms and it has an estimated range of 12,000 to 15,000 kilometers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DF-5

 

[CCP]

China first nuclear submarine 1970 12-26

BTW， by today, India have to import small arms , bullets ,artillery guns, shells.....
Army goes shopping to replace its small arms: Lighter and more lethal guns for
soldiers
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2234593/Army-goes-shopping-replace-small-arms-Lighter-lethal-guns-soldiers.html

 

[CCP]

self deleting

 

[Compersion]

Let's compare India (today) with China at 1971:

China

1.First hydrogen bomb test: "Test No. 6" - June 17, 1967
The yield was 3.3 megatons.dropped by H-6 bomber.
Test No. 6 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(PLA) China Chinese Nuclear bomb testing 1967 - YouTube

2.The decision to develop the DF-4 was made in 1965.
The range of the Dong Feng 4, which is equipped with a 2,190 kg nuclear warhead with 3.3 Mt yield, with a nominal range of 5,500 km.
DF-4 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


3. DF3 + Thermonuclear warhead tests yield 3mt and 3.4mt at 1969
Database of nuclear tests, China-PRC

4.DF-5 1971
The Dongfeng 5[Wǔ] (Chinese: 東風-5, literally "Eurus 5") or DF-5 is a 3 stage Chinese ICBM. It has a length of 32.6 m and a diameter of 3.35 m. It weighs in at 183,000 kilograms and it has an estimated range of 12,000 to 15,000 kilometers.

DF-5 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please relax and also take a breath I am not here belittle PRC people and comrades. Please dont think that the assessment with PRC is done to show superiority out of greed and being oppressor - it is done out of necessity since the last entrant (replacing another) to the UNSC was PRC and also the PRC 1971 - 1981 period had great precedent value (including ICBM PRC tests) that India would value when it goes ahead with enhancement and advancement of its position among the comity of nations that would be good for world peace and stability. The precedent value is there because there is no other choice and also because India will be able to say that 1971 - 1981 PRC was able to achieve [x] while India today is far far ahead of 1971 - 1981 PRC in reference to [x] in both flavor and credibility. This is not for greed and oppressor role but the standing and position India will take among the comity of nations for world peace and stability due to its principles and outlook.

You reference two areas (missile test range and nuclear test yield) where PRC of 1971 is ahead of India 2014. I am afraid that with reference to missile test range India has not tested a proper ICBM yet. When India does -> it would have taken ahead of PRC of 1971 - 1981 on every aspect. Some might say the Agni series (in terms of capability and performance) is ahead of what PRC had in 1971 - 1981 but that is not a good position to take. unfortunately how things work it is about range.

For nuclear test yield that is more on showcasing ability and technical infrastructure. From my reading India has the same ability (you can refer to india having thermonuclear test and yields) and perhaps more advanced and safer nuclear industry.

On your other post you reference PRC having nuclear sub in 1970. I am not a expert on 1970 era PRC nuclear sub capability (and its ability) but India has nuclear sub capability and ability today and is being advanced more and more while we speak. Also with reference to fire arms i am sure that India today is far more advanced compare to the PRC 1971 - 1981 military. Are you saying the India military today is not far far ahead of PRC 1971 - 1981 military.

I believe many will argue that India today might be ahead of PRC military today in terms of overall discipline, capability and ability.

There are other aspects where you do not mention where India is far far ahead of 1971 - 1981 PRC for example:
- large and powerful;
- committed to democracy and human rights;
- responsible in how it develops and uses military power;
- a positive force for arms control and nonproliferation; and
- willing to contribute militarily to deter or stop violent conflict and save lives.

It is a matter of time before India tests a ICBM beyond 10,000 km range. We cannot have people remain ignorant forever on the rightful capability and ability of India and also it inevitable role in world affairs. The ICBM test would not be a threat to anyone but more a signal on India arriving. A bit like the GSLV test, nuclear sub and aircraft carrier.

 

[CCP]

Please relax and also take a breath I am not here belittle PRC people and comrades. Please dont think that the assessment with PRC is done to show superiority out of greed and being oppressor - it is done out of necessity since the last entrant (replacing another) to the UNSC was PRC and also the PRC 1971 - 1981 period had great precedent value (including ICBM PRC tests) that India would value when it goes ahead with enhancement and advancement of its position among the comity of nations that would be good for world peace and stability. The precedent value is there because there is no other choice and also because India will be able to say that 1971 - 1981 PRC was able to achieve [x] while India today is far far ahead of 1971 - 1981 PRC in reference to [x] in both flavor and credibility. This is not for greed and oppressor role but the standing and position India will take among the comity of nations for world peace and stability due to its principles and outlook.

You reference two areas (missile test range and nuclear test yield) where PRC of 1971 is ahead of India 2014. I am afraid that with reference to missile test range India has not tested a proper ICBM yet. When India does -> it would have taken ahead of PRC of 1971 - 1981 on every aspect. Some might say the Agni series (in terms of capability and performance) is ahead of what PRC had in 1971 - 1981 but that is not a good position to take. unfortunately how things work it is about range.

For nuclear test yield that is more on showcasing ability and technical infrastructure. From my reading India has the same ability (you can refer to india having thermonuclear test and yields) and perhaps more advanced and safer nuclear industry.

On your other post you reference PRC having nuclear sub in 1970. I am not a expert on 1970 era PRC nuclear sub capability (and its ability) but India has nuclear sub capability and ability today and is being advanced more and more while we speak. Also with reference to fire arms i am sure that India today is far more advanced compare to the PRC 1971 - 1981 military. Are you saying the India military today is not far far ahead of PRC 1971 - 1981 military.

I believe many will argue that India today might be ahead of PRC military today in terms of overall discipline, capability and ability.

There are other aspects where you do not mention where India is far far ahead of 1971 - 1981 PRC for example:
- large and powerful;
- committed to democracy and human rights;
- responsible in how it develops and uses military power;
- a positive force for arms control and nonproliferation; and
- willing to contribute militarily to deter or stop violent conflict and save lives.

It is a matter of time before India tests a ICBM beyond 10,000 km range. We cannot have people remain ignorant forever on the rightful capability and ability of India and also it inevitable role in world affairs. The ICBM test would not be a threat to anyone but more a signal on India arriving. A bit like the GSLV test, nuclear sub and aircraft carrier.

1. yields
India announced it had conducted a test of a single device in 1974 near Pakistan's eastern border under the codename Operation Smiling Buddha. After 24 years, India publicly announced five further nuclear tests on May 11 and May 13, 1998. The official number of Indian nuclear tests is 6, conducted under two different code-names and at different times.

May 18, 1974: Operation Smiling Buddha (type: implosion, plutonium and underground). One underground test in a horizontal shaft around 107 m long under the long-constructed Indian Army Pokhran Test Range (IA-PTR) in the Thar Desert, eastern border of Pakistan. The Indian Meteorological Department and the Atomic Energy Commission announced the yield of the weapon at 12 kt. Other Western sources claimed the yield to be around 2–12 kt. However, the claim was dismissed by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists and it was later reported to be 8 kt.[13]

May 11, 1998: Operation Shakti (type: implosion, 3 uranium and 2 plutonium devices, all underground). The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) of India and the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) simultaneously conducted a test of three nuclear devices at the Indian Army Pokhran Test Range (IAPTR) on May 11, 1998. Two days later, on May 13, the AEC and DRDO carried out a test of two further nuclear devices, detonated simultaneously. During this operation, AEC India claimed to have tested a three-stage thermonuclear device (Teller-Ulam design), but the yield of the tests was significantly lower than that expected from thermonuclear devices. The yields remain questionable, at best, by Western and Indian scholars, estimated at 20kt-45kt.

List of nuclear weapons tests - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2. India does not build any submarine by today. You can not call a " submarine " without power a submarine.

3."Also with reference to fire arms i am sure that India today is far more advanced compare to the PRC 1971 - 1981 military. " LOL

Can India produced any big calibre artillery guns today?
China mass produced 152mm guns before 1960, and type 56 (AK47) at 1956.


4."When India does -> it would have taken ahead of PRC of 1971 - 1981 on every aspect."

When? What are you waiting for?

 

[sayareakd]

1. yields
India announced it had conducted a test of a single device in 1974 near Pakistan's eastern border under the codename Operation Smiling Buddha. After 24 years, India publicly announced five further nuclear tests on May 11 and May 13, 1998. The official number of Indian nuclear tests is 6, conducted under two different code-names and at different times.

May 18, 1974: Operation Smiling Buddha (type: implosion, plutonium and underground). One underground test in a horizontal shaft around 107 m long under the long-constructed Indian Army Pokhran Test Range (IA-PTR) in the Thar Desert, eastern border of Pakistan. The Indian Meteorological Department and the Atomic Energy Commission announced the yield of the weapon at 12 kt. Other Western sources claimed the yield to be around 2–12 kt. However, the claim was dismissed by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists and it was later reported to be 8 kt.[13]

May 11, 1998: Operation Shakti (type: implosion, 3 uranium and 2 plutonium devices, all underground). The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) of India and the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) simultaneously conducted a test of three nuclear devices at the Indian Army Pokhran Test Range (IAPTR) on May 11, 1998. Two days later, on May 13, the AEC and DRDO carried out a test of two further nuclear devices, detonated simultaneously. During this operation, AEC India claimed to have tested a three-stage thermonuclear device (Teller-Ulam design), but the yield of the tests was significantly lower than that expected from thermonuclear devices. The yields remain questionable, at best, by Western and Indian scholars, estimated at 20kt-45kt.

List of nuclear weapons tests - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2. India does not build any submarine by today. You can not call a " submarine " without power a submarine.

that is what i am saying we should conduct 40-50 nuclear tests so that we are in equal terms with China. Plus that will make you happy, now that our yield is verified by these 40-50 tests.

 

[CCP]

that is what i am saying we should conduct 40-50 nuclear tests so that we are in equal terms with China. Plus that will make you happy, now that our yield is verified by these 40-50 tests.

When? what are you waiting for?

 

[northernarunachalpradesh]

When? what are you waiting for?

 

[Srinivas_K]

When? what are you waiting for?

Until now we have to deal with a small state called Pakistan, reason why India never spent money on defense forces. Now that we have to deal with the situation in Asia every thing will speed up.

what is there to be proud of these defense toys??

CCP needs guns to shoot its won people if control is lost and so they manufacture them in large numbers. CCP is a military oppressor which concentrate more on these toys.

 

[A chauhan]

When? what are you waiting for?

You are quoting a 16 years old news, we can further test through our supercomputers via simulations, DRDO is developing MIRV/MaRVs and it proves that the yield problem is no more.

 

[CCP]

You are quoting a 16 years old news, we can further test through our supercomputers via simulations, DRDO is developing MIRV/MaRVs and it proves that the yield problem is no more.

How can you " test through our supercomputers via simulations" without any data or data form a failed test?